My mom worked in a hotel in Boston during the war, and they often had celebrities in to push war bonds or whatever. She has shared stories. They had Fred Astaire in with two hot blondes on his arms, and even then she knew he was gay. Victor Mature (Samson) leaned over the counter to ask her something (sigh, that would have done me in). And Lucille Ball was always spot on, coiffed, ready to go, professional. I honesty was never much of a fan of her comedy, but my mother's assessment of her as a consummate professional means something. She does not bestow praise lightly.
I honestly cannot remember when I read the book. I don't recall if I found it on my own or was assigned it when I was younger. I do know that it's one of those books that I never forgot having read, though. And that it was one I recommended occasionally to others, but with the show, and Trump, it's been coming back again. Historians tell us that history repeats itself and that we have to learn from it to prevent it. Atwood herself states that everything she uses in the book has been done before. And that's why it feels so relevant now. History is again repeating itself and we're still not learning enough from it to prevent it for our future generations.
Yes, and to the way the word itself has been rendered slippery by such things. It's heard and understood differently by different people as a result.
When I was in college, academic feminism (early 1990's) in my part of the world was all about writing the body and was not intersectional and frustrated the living daylights out of me because here we were hearing about horrible things done to women in different parts of the world and people were wasting time and brainpower and energy wittering on about creating a language for women. Which would be learned by whom? Would be of use to? Didn't we have bigger problems?
If you had asked me then if I was a feminist, I would have asked you to define your meaning of the term for me before answering. There was a part of me, reading The Handmaid's Tale back then, that almost agreed with Offred's frustration with her mother but could still see how, in essence, her mother had been proven horribly correct. I've read the book at least 4 times now because apparently I am a masochist, and every single time I've read it there is something else that gives me the skeeved out neck prickles of "Oh fuck, it's happening now". Unlike Atwood, IDGAF about who is asking these days. I'm a feminist. But then, I sometimes think she's refusing the "label" so anti-feminists read her books (she says she's not a feminist!) and might actually learn something as a result.
I quit watching in the second season too. I remember a conversation with a workmate where we had both realized at the same time that no matter how good the acting, we were watching women being tortured and mistreated week after week and for why? Neither of us had a good answer, and neither of us trusted the show once it went past the narrative of the first book, so we both stopped watching. I am interested in how they will handle The Testaments, though.
shouldn't be- but the few examples of such change, in my limited experience, came about because a guy wanted to impress some woman but wound up learning something from her.
“Perhaps he's reached that state of intoxication which power is said to inspire, the state in which you believe you are indispensable and can therefore do anything, absolutely anything you feel like, anything at all.”
My mom worked in a hotel in Boston during the war, and they often had celebrities in to push war bonds or whatever. She has shared stories. They had Fred Astaire in with two hot blondes on his arms, and even then she knew he was gay. Victor Mature (Samson) leaned over the counter to ask her something (sigh, that would have done me in). And Lucille Ball was always spot on, coiffed, ready to go, professional. I honesty was never much of a fan of her comedy, but my mother's assessment of her as a consummate professional means something. She does not bestow praise lightly.
*shudder*
She saw a future like that because history repeats itself. She was/is a historian and everything in that book, she has taken from history.
I honestly cannot remember when I read the book. I don't recall if I found it on my own or was assigned it when I was younger. I do know that it's one of those books that I never forgot having read, though. And that it was one I recommended occasionally to others, but with the show, and Trump, it's been coming back again. Historians tell us that history repeats itself and that we have to learn from it to prevent it. Atwood herself states that everything she uses in the book has been done before. And that's why it feels so relevant now. History is again repeating itself and we're still not learning enough from it to prevent it for our future generations.
Yes, and to the way the word itself has been rendered slippery by such things. It's heard and understood differently by different people as a result.
When I was in college, academic feminism (early 1990's) in my part of the world was all about writing the body and was not intersectional and frustrated the living daylights out of me because here we were hearing about horrible things done to women in different parts of the world and people were wasting time and brainpower and energy wittering on about creating a language for women. Which would be learned by whom? Would be of use to? Didn't we have bigger problems?
If you had asked me then if I was a feminist, I would have asked you to define your meaning of the term for me before answering. There was a part of me, reading The Handmaid's Tale back then, that almost agreed with Offred's frustration with her mother but could still see how, in essence, her mother had been proven horribly correct. I've read the book at least 4 times now because apparently I am a masochist, and every single time I've read it there is something else that gives me the skeeved out neck prickles of "Oh fuck, it's happening now". Unlike Atwood, IDGAF about who is asking these days. I'm a feminist. But then, I sometimes think she's refusing the "label" so anti-feminists read her books (she says she's not a feminist!) and might actually learn something as a result.
I quit watching in the second season too. I remember a conversation with a workmate where we had both realized at the same time that no matter how good the acting, we were watching women being tortured and mistreated week after week and for why? Neither of us had a good answer, and neither of us trusted the show once it went past the narrative of the first book, so we both stopped watching. I am interested in how they will handle The Testaments, though.
It's based on The Tempest, not Macbeth. It's extremely good. I'd read some meh reviews of it, but I feel like they were being excessively nit-picky.
Oh, thanks.
shouldn't be- but the few examples of such change, in my limited experience, came about because a guy wanted to impress some woman but wound up learning something from her.
The fact that rape was not the thing that bothered them tells me all I want to know about 7th Day Adventists.
Maybe her resistance to the term 'feminist' is a semantic issue? Her definition may include elements my definition does not contain.
“Perhaps he's reached that state of intoxication which power is said to inspire, the state in which you believe you are indispensable and can therefore do anything, absolutely anything you feel like, anything at all.”
― Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid's Tale
You can't mail it? I live in NYC.
Now I understand. It'll take as long as it takes, I'm a patient Patient Navigator.
Glad to hear you're a happy cammer.
Like I said, I need to clear space on my hard drive. If you want me to mail you a disc, sure. But I need the space to do the rip. :)